Crossle Record
Page 172
said arrears due to the widow Blenerhassett, demanding at the same time possession of the lands from John Bettie who refused, but assured said John Johnston he would pay to Plaintiff Samuel Johnston 40/~ yearly for life of Plt. for Plaintiff's title to the lands. That John Bettie sometime since made over to one James Johnston said lands in order to secure James Johnston for some lands which he (Jas. Johnston) had entered into from John Bettie. That James Johnston having become possessed of the lands did in 1707 to farm let to Rowland Bettie (son to said John Bettie) said lands for a term of 11 years at the rent of 6d. per acre. That Plt. is in possession of a part of said lands since 1703 and enjoyed same quietly till about 3 June 1709. Rowland Bettie came and distrained Plt. of two cows and threatened to still further distrain Plaintiff. That John Bettie has often importuned Plt. for Plt's title to the lands. That the Defendants threaten to ruin Plaintiff for demanding return of the lands. Now so it is John Bettie and Rowland Bettie say they will keep Plaintiff out of his title to the lands.
Prays for writ against John Bettie, Rowland Bettie and James Johnston to answer in the premises. Bill entered 30 June 1709.
Exchequer. bill:
John Johnston, Defendant[sic, should be Plaintiff] Rowland Betty, John Betty and James Johnston, Defendants.
Bill 21 March 1711. No answer.
Plaintiff John Johnston of Thomas Street, Dublin, gent, showeth that Samuel Johnston, father to Petitioner being seized in fee of the lands of Tully Callrick, Co. Fermanagh, he in 1692 mortgaged said lands to John Betty of Ardverny [Ardvarney], Co. Fermanagh, for £10. That in the year 1703 Plt. had a dispute with one John Armstrong concerning the tithes of Lawry [Lowrey?] and Rossgoule [Rossgole], Co. Fermanagh and in 1704 having occasion to examine witnesses in said cause depending between Plt. and said Armstrong in H.M.'s Court of Chancery, and said John Betty being one of Plt's most material witnesses in said cause was subpoened by Plt to give his evidence. That Rowland Betty, son to said John Betty being advised thereof did obstruct John Betty from appearing to give evidence unless Plt. would execute a bond to him (Rowland) and to one James Johnston (to whom John Betty was considerably indebted) conditioned that said Samuel Johnston should not call John Betty to account for said lands of Tullycallrick so mortgaged to John Betty in 1692 but that same should be an absolute sale to John Betty and his heirs, although same was no more than in mortgage to John Betty subject to a redemption of £10. That Plt being advised his cause against Armstrong would fall through unless he had the evidence of John Betty, Plt. accordingly in May 1704 executed to Rowland Betty and James Johnston a penalty bond for £100 conditioned that Samuel Johnston should not claim any title to said lands of Tullycallrick or endeavor to redeem same or by said bonds in the hands of Rowland
|
